About your Search

20130416
20130424
Search Results 0 to 1 of about 2
the 19-year-old his miranda rules. there is a right for his to remain silent and right to attorney if there is a continued threat to public safety. the aclu says that the public safety exception should be read narrowly and denying the rights is un-american. professor from uc berkeley says that the first questions that are posed will have to do with with the motive. >> first psychologically, and some wayward nut like columbine or some of the school shooters have been or what are the linkages, and what is this guy -- who has he been linked up to? >> most experts think that the case will be tried in federal court, and pros ecutors will mot likely charge him with use of weapons of mass destruction which could make the case eligible for capital punishment. coming up at 6:00 on the bay, thousands of runners are taking to the streets in london for a marathon and the first since monday's attacks. we will look at the security measures and how the runners are honoring the boston victims. >>> and scary moment as the body of a racecar goes flying into the stands. what officials say caused the
that they don't have to read him his miranda rights right away. as time passes, does the justification for that exception grow weaker? are they on ls strong ground? >> it sure does, because as you know, miranda rights are a bedrock constitutional principle. we all have the right to remain silent, t get an attorney and be advised of those rights. the public safety exemption is a very narrow exemption. there has to be an imminent threat to the public. it certainly seems less imminent. >> don't officials who say the terror is over, don't they kind of undercut that argument, and does it really matter in the end? >> this is certainly an argument that's going to be handed to this defendant's defense attorney when that time comes. there have been contradictory statements made that there is no public threat, there is no ticking bomb, thank goodness, apparently, based on what we know so far. so we're giving them an argument to use later. >> the issue is, the questioning that's permitted without miranda is very narrow in scope, correct? >> yes. it's about what the public threat is. it's not all
Search Results 0 to 1 of about 2